The United States have its own current strategies to counter state sponsored terrorism. It is based upon Former President George W. Bush Doctrine. When he addressed the National Security Strategy in October 2002 to the nation, he made it clear that, “ America will hold to account nations that are compromised by terror, including those who harbor terrorist because the allies of terror are the enemies of the civilization. In this essay we will look at current strategies being used to repel possible terrorist attack, furthermore, we will evaluate whether such current strategies should differ when developing ways to counter state sponsored terrorism. In addition to that we will also take a look if state sponsored terrorism differs qualitatively from other forms of terrorism. According to Goura (20130, “ What is new in the aftermath of 9/11 is the determination by policy makers to define to define the state sponsors of terrorism as direct threats to the nation-state itself, rather than tangential problems requiring diplomatic solution”, p. (127). We have to look at the state-sponsored terrorism as a threat to our nations security. Although, they are just supporting the terrorist groups, they should be held accountable in the same level that the terrorist are. Providing support and safe haven to these groups are the same as killing innocent lives. Why? These terrorist groups continues to declare war and terror because they can get armed and they can hide with the state acting as their safe haven. One prime example is what happened in 9/11. The United States believed that the attacked was state-sponsored. Bin Laden being the leader of the terrorist group Al- Qaeda and other members are being harbored in Afghanistan. The United States looked at Afghanistan as it is guilty of terrorism the way they looked at Al Qaeda, because Afghanistan was guilty also on act of terrorism for supporting the terrorist that attack the twin towers in September 11, 2001. Just like Former President George W. Bush said in his National Security Strategy, “ We will make no distinction between terrorist and those who knowingly harbor or provide aid to them. When Bin laden was refuse to be hand over to the United States, the war led by United States in Afghanistan started. The United States deployed military personnel to Afghanistan and started the bombing. The United States did not think twice when Bin Laden who planned the 9/11 attack along with the other terrorist responsible for the death of innocent lives, they launch an airstrike in Afghanistan which prompted the war on terrorism back in 2001. The attack on Afghanistan was believed to be the response to the attack on September 9/11. One of the guides that the United States use in their counter terrorism method was discussed in Counter Terrorism strategy in June 01, 2011.
…show more content…
According to President Obama (2011), “Adherence to those core values—respecting human rights, fostering good governance, respecting privacy and civil liberties, committing to security and transparency, and upholding the rule of law—enables us to build broad international coalitions to act against the common threat posed by our adversaries while further delegitimizing, isolating, and weakening their efforts”, p. (4). This guideline is what we use to continue our counter terrorism efforts. One of the core value that he mention is respecting human rights, we continue our fight for terrorism for we all believe that terrorism is a violation of human rights. They do not chose what gender, age and religion the terrorist launch their attack and destroy a mass population. Part of our counter terrorism effort is protecting the human rights from any act of violence from the terrorist. In developing ways to counter state sponsored terrorism, this should not be any different in combatting a terrorist group. The state that support the terrorist should be suppressed therefore, no logistics and arms can be moved in order for the terrorist to carry out their plan of attack. For example what the United States done in Afghanistan when they launch the attack is a way to counter state-sponsored terrorism. The US led war was directed to Afghanistan where Bin Laden and other members of Al Qaeda were hiding. The Bush administration will not hesitate to do preemptive strikes against terrorist if they are treating the lives of the American people. Although, state-sponsored terrorism is as guilty
According to President Obama (2011), “Adherence to those core values—respecting human rights, fostering good governance, respecting privacy and civil liberties, committing to security and transparency, and upholding the rule of law—enables us to build broad international coalitions to act against the common threat posed by our adversaries while further delegitimizing, isolating, and weakening their efforts”, p. (4). This guideline is what we use to continue our counter terrorism efforts. One of the core value that he mention is respecting human rights, we continue our fight for terrorism for we all believe that terrorism is a violation of human rights. They do not chose what gender, age and religion the terrorist launch their attack and destroy a mass population. Part of our counter terrorism effort is protecting the human rights from any act of violence from the terrorist. In developing ways to counter state sponsored terrorism, this should not be any different in combatting a terrorist group. The state that support the terrorist should be suppressed therefore, no logistics and arms can be moved in order for the terrorist to carry out their plan of attack. For example what the United States done in Afghanistan when they launch the attack is a way to counter state-sponsored terrorism. The US led war was directed to Afghanistan where Bin Laden and other members of Al Qaeda were hiding. The Bush administration will not hesitate to do preemptive strikes against terrorist if they are treating the lives of the American people. Although, state-sponsored terrorism is as guilty